You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "Earwin Burrfoot (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2011/05/05 18:09:03 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-2904) non-contiguous LogMergePolicy
should be careful to not select merges already running
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2904?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13029403#comment-13029403 ]
Earwin Burrfoot commented on LUCENE-2904:
-----------------------------------------
I think we should simply change the API for MergePolicy.
Instead of SegmentInfos it should accept a Set<SegmentInfo> with SIs eligible for merging (eg, completely written & not elected for another merge).
IW.getMergingSegments() is a damn cheat, and "Expert" notice is not an excuse! :)
Why should each and every MP do the set substraction when IW can do it for them once and for all?
> non-contiguous LogMergePolicy should be careful to not select merges already running
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2904
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2904
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.2, 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-2904.patch
>
>
> Now that LogMP can do non-contiguous merges, the fact that it disregards which segments are already being merged is more problematic since it could result in it returning conflicting merges and thus failing to run multiple merges concurrently.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org